Forensic science used in criminal justice has recently been revolutionized with new DNA technology, but fingerprinting is still the most valid and effective form of identification used in law enforcement today. Going back in the time of ancient Babylon, fingerprints and ridge patterns were used on clay tablets for business transactions and governmental procedures. By the 14th century, the fact that no two prints were alike was becoming more noticeable, thus the history of the fingerprint began. Noting the ridges, spirals, and loops in fingerprints, Marcello Malpighi, a professor of anatomy at the University of Bologna, made no declaration to the value of personal identification, but began to point out the differences in fingerprint patterns in 1686. Then, in 1823, a professor of anatomy at the University of Breslau, John Evangelist Purkinji, discussed nine fingerprint patterns in a published thesis, but still did not take notice to the individuality of each print. It wasn't until 1856 that Englishman and Chief Magistrate, Sir William Hershel, used fingerprints on native documents. After gathering many prints, Hershel took notice to the fact that all the prints were unique and could prove identity from all those he made transactions with. Dr. Henry Faulds, the British Surgeon-Superintendent of Tsukihi Hospital in Tokyo, Japan, shared his studies with Charles Darwin in 1880, but Darwin, who was rather ill at the time, could be of no service to Faulds studies. Eight years later, Sir Francis Galton, a British anthropologist and Darwin's cousin, began to study Faulds' articles on fingerprint classification. Galton began to concentrate on linking fingerprints to genetic history and intelligence, but had no luck. Scientifically proving that fingerprints never changed during one's lifetime, Galton stated that the odds of two prints to be exactly the same were 1 in 64 billion.
             In 1901, Sir Edward Richard Henry revised ...